this post was submitted on 20 Jan 2026
872 points (98.8% liked)

News

36043 readers
2626 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.


Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.


7. No duplicate posts.


If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.


All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Support among House Democrats for impeaching Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem is skyrocketing, nearly doubling in the last week to 100 co-sponsors.

That's an unprecedented level of support for an impeachment effort during President Trump's second term, with lawmakers who have bristled at the topic in the past now warming to the idea.

Kelly is urging Republicans to get on board with her efforts — even as no GOP lawmaker has come close to expressing support for Noem's impeachment.

"As Secretary Noem continues to lie, obstruct Congress, and violate people's civil rights, the support for her impeachment only grows," she said.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] CmdrShepard49@sh.itjust.works 16 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Thats exactly correct and anyone who tries to say otherwise is either being willfully ignorant or intentionally minimizing this fact. You might also be surprised to learn that many of these Dems voted against impeaching Trump for a third time last year. Their actions speak much louder than words.

[–] JasonDJ@lemmy.zip 6 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (2 children)

They likely gave up because they realized that trying to impeach him is just adding fuel to his bases fire.

You gotta realize that Trump has a third of the country believing that he is a victim of political persecution. The "witch hunt" rhetoric was taken hook, line, and sinker. They sincerely and earnestly believe that Trump is a good man with a righteous vision, who is targeted by "the radical left", which is "weaponizing" the DoJ or the impeachment process.

And unfortunately, that less than 1/3 of the country lives in the right place to make them worth more than half of the seats in the Senate, so impeachment was bound to go nowhere and ultimately hurt the democratic party going into the next elections.

And this plot predates even Trump's first term. Part of the reason this guy is now Teflon is that he installed a lot of court seats. Partly due to Mitch holding back the nomination of Merrick Garland, but he was also holding back a shitload of lower court vacancies so that they could get filled by 45.

I agree that he should have been impeached, tried, and ultimately convicted. Honestly at this point, I feel like he should be hung for treason. But politics, sadly, can't always align with justice.

[–] CmdrShepard49@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

They likely gave up because they realized that trying to impeach him is just adding fuel to his bases fire.

You gotta realize that Trump has a third of the country believing that he is a victim of political persecution. The "witch hunt" rhetoric was taken hook, line, and sinker. They sincerely and earnestly believe that Trump is a good man with a righteous vision, who is targeted by "the radical left", which is "weaponizing" the DoJ or the impeachment process.

But if we apply this logic then Democrats should never oppose Trump or any other Republican, and where does that leave us? I find this quite ridiculous as not only does it excuse Democratic inaction but also mandates that they bend over backwards to support him in the future for fear of losing their job (a job that quite literally is to represent the people).

Merrick Garland lost his shot at SCOTUS because instead of fighting back when the law was fully on their side nearly a year before the 2016 election, they arrogantly thought that they were guaranteed to win and Clinton would then get the nomination. They again backed down in 2020 just a month before the election and allowed Republicans to ram a nomination through. They backed down in Texas and allowed the Republican legislature to gerrymander districts and pick up several seats. They backed down on the government shutdown and allowed Republicans to take away our healthcare. They backed down and allowed the passage of the BBB. They're backing down and allowing the capture of a sovereign nation's president. They're backing down and allowing ICE to murder citizens in the streets.

These are all reasons why they're losing elections. They're supposed to be the opposition party yet they refuse to oppose anything and even vote alongside Republicans often enough. Refusing to acknowledge this is why Trump won in 2016. It's why he nearly one again in 2020, and it's why he won in 2024. With each passing day they look more and more like they're all members of the same party because that's the only logical explanation for what's happening. Using the same tired excuses over and over and over only gets you so far before people see right through the BS.

[–] JasonDJ@lemmy.zip 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (3 children)

But if we apply this logic then Democrats should never oppose Trump or any other Republican, and where does that leave us?

I respectfully disagree on this point, and this point only. They attempted to impeach him twice. A third time, after he is out of office, wouldn't have really done anything beneficial. Without a conviction in the senate, he would still have been eligible to run in 2024, and his base would've been even more fired up. It would be seen as more liberal virtue signaling and another witch hunt.

It was quite clear by that point what game the Republicans were playing...another impeachment would have played right into that hand. Having the cooperation of a not-insignificant portion of the media who only played up the victim rhetoric was also a big factor.

The legal system, which is supposed to be apolitical, was the best course of action. And continues to be the best course of action, because the majority of both houses continues to be Trump loyalists. Drown them in lawsuits, a million papercuts, etc.

It's far from a perfect solution, though, due to the aforementioned blocking of lower-court appointments, Merrick Garland (who, like, bullshit, I agree, should've fought harder), and then RBG dying at a very inopportune time, leading to a vulgar show of hypocrisy on the right and another weak resistance on the left.

And, it plays into the continued "weaponizing the justice system" rhetoric. Like, dude...it's not "weaponizing the justice system" if you're continually doing unlawful and even unconstitutional things. But good luck explaining that to the 33% of the country who would struggle to get a D on a 6th grade Civics test.

I do agree that Democrat's are really sucking as "The Resistance". The biggest thing they need to work on is messaging and having a united front.

But honestly, what can they do, really? The American People have spoken, and this is what they asked for, by the democratically instilled laws of our country.

There is no way to win, inside the system, by continuing to play by the rules. But, as long as Republicans hold the trifecta and the fourth-estate, any attempt to break the rules will not be cast in their favor.

The only way, I think, starts with finding an effective antidote to their koolaid.

[–] CmdrShepard49@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

They attempted to impeach him twice. A third time, after he is out of office, wouldn't have really done anything beneficial. Without a conviction in the senate, he would still have been eligible to run in 2024, and his base would've been even more fired up. It would be seen as more liberal virtue signaling and another witch hunt.

This just happened in June

And then again a few weeks ago in December...

I dont really care if it succeeds. At least it's concrete action far beyond angry letters and tweets.

[–] DougHolland@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

An "opposition party" that won't even make an effort to oppose.

[–] CmdrShepard49@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 month ago

They attempted to impeach him twice. A third time, after he is out of office, wouldn't have really done anything beneficial. Without a conviction in the senate, he would still have been eligible to run in 2024, and his base would've been even more fired up. It would be seen as more liberal virtue signaling and another witch hunt.

This just happened in June

And then again a few weeks ago in December...

I dont really care if it succeeds. At least it's concrete action far beyond angry letters and tweets.

[–] CmdrShepard49@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 month ago

They attempted to impeach him twice. A third time, after he is out of office, wouldn't have really done anything beneficial. Without a conviction in the senate, he would still have been eligible to run in 2024, and his base would've been even more fired up. It would be seen as more liberal virtue signaling and another witch hunt.

This just happened in June

And then again in December...

I dont really care if it succeeds. At least it's concrete action far beyond angry letters and tweets.

[–] BanMe@lemmy.world -1 points 1 month ago

Lemmy firmly believes that every American is as far left as them, sees things the way the front page sees things, and that Democrats are the real problem. It's naive and self-absorbed, but there it is.